2015
DOI: 10.1155/2015/184398
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Hierarchic Analysis Method to Evaluate Rock Burst Risk

Abstract: In order to reasonably evaluate the risk of rock bursts in mines, the factors impacting rock bursts and the existing grading criterion on the risk of rock bursts were studied. By building a model of hierarchic analysis method, the natural factors, technology factors, and management factors that influence rock bursts were analyzed and researched, which determined the degree of each factor’s influence (i.e., weight) and comprehensive index. Then the grade of rock burst risk was assessed. The results showed that … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 5 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Based on the literature investigation and on-the-spot measurement of tunnel, the following indexes are selected to describe a tunnel section [27][28][29][30][31][32][33]: the Russian criterion value C 1 (C 1 � σ θmax /σ C , i.e., the ratio of maximum tangential stress of chamber σ θmax to rock uniaxial compressive strength σ C ), rock brittleness coefficient C 2 (C 2 � σ C /σ t , i.e., ratio of uniaxial compressive strength σ C to uniaxial tensile strength of rock σ t ), the grade of groundwater condition C 3 and rock integrity coefficient C 4 (Kv value). e above indexes reflect the different attributes of the tunnel section, respectively.…”
Section: Application In Rockburst Predictionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Based on the literature investigation and on-the-spot measurement of tunnel, the following indexes are selected to describe a tunnel section [27][28][29][30][31][32][33]: the Russian criterion value C 1 (C 1 � σ θmax /σ C , i.e., the ratio of maximum tangential stress of chamber σ θmax to rock uniaxial compressive strength σ C ), rock brittleness coefficient C 2 (C 2 � σ C /σ t , i.e., ratio of uniaxial compressive strength σ C to uniaxial tensile strength of rock σ t ), the grade of groundwater condition C 3 and rock integrity coefficient C 4 (Kv value). e above indexes reflect the different attributes of the tunnel section, respectively.…”
Section: Application In Rockburst Predictionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Manifesting stability and destruction level of gearbox's degradation and malfunction [36] Kurtosis index…”
Section: Damage Indicators Feature Symbol Equation Implicationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Therefore, inaccurate early warning cases would occur. Moreover, the uncertainty theories mainly include fuzzy mathematics [18,19], the rough set theory [20,21], the cloud model theory [22,23], the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) [24,25], the grey system theory [26], and the set pair analysis [27], which have been broadly applied to the prediction study of rock bursts. Although these methods introduce fuzzy and random characteristics to the influencing factors of rock bursts [28], the evaluation and analysis of the rock burst indicators mainly rely on experience and are relatively subjective, leading to a large gap between the prediction results and the actual situation.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%